Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Adelaide air traffic control may shift to Melbourne

Wikiposts
Search
The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Adelaide air traffic control may shift to Melbourne

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 17th Feb 2015, 23:17
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Adelaide air traffic control may shift to Melbourne

Adelaide's air traffic control could be 'cut' and moved to Melbourne in centralisation decision - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
kaz3g is offline  
Old 18th Feb 2015, 01:09
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MEL
Posts: 192
Received 12 Likes on 6 Posts
Yellow Journalism at its best.

The Advertiser : "Adelaide Airport landings controlled from Melbourne"
Track5milefinal is offline  
Old 18th Feb 2015, 02:01
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Australia
Age: 34
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Adelaide air traffic control may shift to Melbourne

Why is this a big deal? Seems like a good way to reduce costs, what difference does it make if controllers are based at adelaide or melbourne, will still be looking at the same screens covering the same area.
MaxFL360 is offline  
Old 18th Feb 2015, 03:35
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,991
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Yep a beat up.

Take USA for example, LA Centre is miles away in Palmdale and covers a big part of, or indeed all of California. SOCAL approach for LAX is done in San Diego ( think it's down there but it ain't at LAX. )

It doesn't matter where the radar controller sits...

Tower controllers on the other hand.......even then it's possible to do that remotely and will be soon for ASP..

Last edited by ACMS; 18th Feb 2015 at 06:13.
ACMS is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 02:11
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 538
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Canberra Approach is done from Melbourne. Remember a C210 with engine failure in IMC vectored into hill because controller lacked local knowledge. I am not denigrating the Controller - local knowledge issue caused due no local (Canberra) familiarity provided to this controller.
They are going to move Cairns App to Brisbane. Not many hills around Cairns are there?

Last edited by topdrop; 21st Feb 2015 at 23:21. Reason: To ensure blame is not placed on the controller
topdrop is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 04:15
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The only problem with the TCU going to Melbourne is they will go to auto release at Adelaide and all the CIR training flights will lose their training slots.
Night Bandit is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 04:24
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,991
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Top drop:---- rubbish, so it matters if the controller ain't in the location he's controlling? Crap, he has a vectoring chart and terrain information in front of his nose and after a famil by a training controller will know everything he needs to know about the airspace he controls. If he doesn't then he shouldn't be there.

Are you telling me that all controllers should work where they are born and raised?
ACMS is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 05:00
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Wellington,NZ
Age: 66
Posts: 1,678
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by topdrop
Canberra Approach is done from Melbourne. Remember a C210 with engine failure in IMC vectored into hill because controller had no local knowledge.
They are going to move Cairns App to Brisbane. Not many hills around Cairns are there?
That implies a failure in the training or validation process, rather than a failure in the principle under discussion.

TBH, I'm more of a fan of having the approach unit co-located at the aerodrome/s it services, but for other reasons. (Eggs/baskets etc.)
Tarq57 is online now  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 05:28
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Night Bandit, have you ever worked auto release? Melbourne with a much higher movement rate than Adelaide is able to process navaid calibration aircraft along with auto release and these can be more awkward than circuits. Get a cct release and a "paper stop" level for departures and give the tower some flexibility.
fujii is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 06:57
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,602
Likes: 0
Received 69 Likes on 28 Posts
This is just a continuation of the origional TAAATS plan.

Great to see leadership at AsA.

The TV and the Print media have attempted to get me to be critical. No way!

If local knowledge is a problem why not give the non-informed controllers a free ticket and a couple of days accommodation in Adelaide. Probably note some hills to the east.

Somehow the approach I do into YGDO in the CJ3 is controlled from Melbourne. I have always had a safe and competent service. How do they do it? I think they must have radar or something like that.
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 21:45
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 538
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
ACMS - you may think my post is rubbish, but if you believe this
after a famil by a training controller will know everything he needs to know about the airspace he controls
I've got a bridge in Sydney for sale
topdrop is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 21:52
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 15
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I remember this issue being raised about eight years ago. I was wondering whether anyone from ATC could comment on the veracity of a compliant I heard against the arrangement at the time, which was essentially as follows:

If approach control was moved to a central location (no longer local), a delay in the radar information reaching the controller's screen would lead to increased separation requirements. A corollary of this was said to be a drop in the overall movement rate.

True or false?

I do also think the 'eggs in baskets' argument has merit too.

Last edited by Dukeunlimited; 22nd Feb 2015 at 21:46. Reason: Spelling.
Dukeunlimited is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 21:55
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Wellington,NZ
Age: 66
Posts: 1,678
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Dukeunlimited
I remember this issue being raised about eight years ago. I was wondering whether anyone from ATC could comment on the voracity of a compliant I heard against the arrangement at the time, which was essentially as follows:

If approach control was moved to a central location (no longer local), a delay in the radar information reaching the controller's screen would lead to increased separation requirements. A corollary of this was said to be a drop in the overall movement rate.

True or false?

I do also think the 'eggs in baskets' argument has merit too.
As far as I'm aware, unless there is a really cumbersome or multi-tier system of data transmission, the delay is likely to be of the order of microseconds, or less.
Tarq57 is online now  
Old 19th Feb 2015, 21:56
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 15
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Many thanks Tarq!
Dukeunlimited is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2015, 01:31
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Remember a C210 with engine failure in IMC vectored into hill because controller had no local knowledge.
I'm interested in how an aircraft with an engine failure can be vectored?
The name is Porter is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2015, 02:06
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All radar information is 'historical' anyway (i.e it's already happened). I wouldn't worry about the distance of transmission having an effect though, the total delay is all in milliseconds.
Hempy is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2015, 02:47
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 538
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
That implies a failure in the training or validation process, rather than a failure in the principle under discussion.
I agree - the failure is brought about due to the cost of providing airfare, accommodation etc so the controllers can gain/refresh the level of local knowledge required for emergencies. The beancounters rule.
topdrop is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2015, 08:47
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,602
Likes: 0
Received 69 Likes on 28 Posts
Topdrop. Do you know the rego of the C210 involved in the accident near canberra. Or the ATSB report number?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2015, 09:15
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One has to accept that data-comms is improving every year and that the location of a controller site becomes less of a consideration.

Now if the bean counters continue to have their way the service may even be outsourced to a call centre in India - just joking.

Technology is the enabler here and systems can now be devised that are much more efficient and safer, in fact the difficulty is in the picking of a suitable technology to invest in.
cattletruck is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2015, 10:44
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 538
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It was SMA
Investigation Report Investigation: 199502193 - Forced/precautionary landing involving a Cessna Aircraft Company P210N, VH-SMA, 38.8km NE Canberra, Aerodrome, NSW on 13 July 1995

Court case settled out of court Injured pilots settle case | Goulburn Post
topdrop is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.